ok so hereâs the long unreadable (and probs uninteresting to anyone else than me) version:
- the site design and overall look. itâs easy to read, easy to navigate, and easy to notice what you can click on. Makes good use of fonts and text sizes and styles to make important things stand out and be easily found at a glance, and is just overall very readable. The icons with hovertext! The tags! the amount of info thatâs readable at a single glance and actually fits on the same page!
this is BASIC STUFF and it is not a given on a LOT of professional library websites i run into regularly and that drives me INSANE. (Mostly bc one of the very popular, cheap, and easy French-language library catalog softwares has a default online catalog design that sucks and which librarians generally donât tinker with much.)
- again this seems obvious, but the filters when youâre inside a fandom/tag are SO VISIBLE and SO EXPLICIT. The filters menu makes it instantly clear what itâs for, is easy to navigate and understand and use, intelligently suggests the most popular tags first (which also immediately gives you a lot of information).
My libraryâs online catalog (which uses the default website set-up I mentioned above) has exactly the same thing, but stupidly executed, unreadable and incomprehensible, and somehow completely unnoticeable despite being exactly in the same place on the page. The site design makes very bad use of the space on the page and basically you just donât even look over there because itâs so far away from where the rest of the information is and it simply never catches your eye, and even when it does, the vocabulary used is so obtuse you donât realize what itâs for.
ITâS SO⌠STUPID AND EASILY FIXABLE⌠but apparently no public library in the french language can afford a website designer, or theyâre all horrifyingly bad
- and finally: THE TAGS. One of the biggest issues we have in catalogs is that people use different words for the same thing. In order for you to find books relevant to your search, we have to apply topic keywords to them (basically: tags), but of course there are Norms so that all libraries, or at least all employees in the same library, use the same keywords. Except despite the norm that still doesnât happen. I donât know how it goes in the English-language world but for French language itâs all horribly complicated and surprisingly non-functional, despite how easy it seems in theory, and leads me to complain about the Bibliothèque Nationale de France about once a week at least.
Easy example that Iâve complained about today (for the 6th time this year): ADHD. The term used by the BNF, that we are supposed to use, is âTrouble de lâhyperactivitĂŠ avec dĂŠficit de lâattentionâ (âhyperactivity disorder with attention deficitâ). Thatâs⌠not only outdated but flat-out inaccurate (according to Frenchâs current stance on it) â the term people actually use nowadays is the opposite way around, âtrouble de lâattention avec ou sans hyperactivitĂŠâ ( âADD with or without hyperactivityâ), commonly abbreviated to âTDA/Hâ. The BNFâs system does accommodate for various synonyms, but it appears unaware of this one, so if you search âTDA/Hâ in the keywords, you wonât find anything. Youâd have to look in the title, and if none of our books have it in their title, youâll find nothing at all, and wonât even be redirected anywhere if we strictly follow the BNF system. (WHAT IS THE POINT OF KEYWORDS THEN, one might ask.)
Tl;dr: you look for the word you and most people actually informed about a topic use, and find nothing at all because some rando has decided thatâs not the word you should be using. (Unsurprisingly, this problem pops up a looot for keywords related to minorities, mental illnesses and LGBT+ topics.)
Itâs like if you tried to search a site for âfluffâ and didnât find anything because the site has decided to continue using âWAFFâ instead. Also, the site has decided that hurt-comfort and guro fic are the same thing, makes no distinction between levels of romance and eroticism so thereâs no way to tell cute handholding from smut, and believes that the word âfurryâ means they get a dog.
=> The system of letting people use their words and linking them â making them synonyms â with what other people have used for the same meaning completely blows my mind. I am in awe of the fact that it works, and that itâs still happening, even though iirc tag-wranglers are unpaid volunteers. I couldnât imagine doing something like that in just our catalog, and AO3 is massive.
The result is: not only do you find what youâre looking for, but if your search accidentally picks up other things too, you know what itâs actually about because you get it in the authorâs words.
AO3â˛s tag system is an incredibly clever and simple solution to a very real and thorny problem that I run into almost every day.
tl;dr AO3 is just generally a perfectly functional and user-friendly site, instantly easy to use in order to tailor your search to exactly what you want (and even more so with the addition of the exclusion operator to the filters sidebar), and on a technical library-science viewpoint, itâs fascinating.